What motivates Republicans? Winning. That’s all they care about. They play to win.
You can never turn your back on them.
The 2012 election may have illustrated where their high water mark is. They may never be able to capture the popular vote again in their lifetime. But they managed to gerrymander the House so it makes little difference anyway.
And why do they want to win soooooo badly? Why does anyone want to win? It’s power and control. When you win, no one can make you pay taxes. That’s the gist of it. It doesn’t really matter what happens to the rest of the country and all of the pitiful sob stories of downtrodden workers and students indentured for the rest of their lives. They don’t need to care about that as long as they got what they spent all that money to achieve and that is control. Control over their lives, completely unfettered from the responsibilities towards others. That is worth a small fortune.
So, the NYTimes seems a little baffled as to why the Democrats waited so long before explicitly spelling out what the sequester was going to mean to state and local governments. The NYTimes is surprised that the Democrats underestimated and misunderstood the Republicans- again:
The White House released warningsfor every state on Sunday in the hope that angry voters would besiege Republican lawmakers like Mr. McConnell and the House speaker, John Boehner, to stop the $85 billion in cuts, known as a sequester. President Obama wants to replace the sequester with a mix of tax increases on the rich and less damaging spending reductions. Republicans say they won’t consider any proposal that isn’t all cuts, so the sequester is all but certain to begin this week.
The White House strategy on the sequester was built around a familiar miscalculation about Republicans. It assumed that, in the end, they would be reasonable and negotiate a realistic alternative to indiscriminate cuts. Because the reductions hurt defense programs long held sacrosanct by Republicans, the White House thought it had leverage that would reduce the damage to the domestic programs favored by Democrats.
It turns out, though, that the defense hawks in the party are outnumbered. More Republicans seem to care about reducing spending at all costs, and the prospect of damaging vital government programs does not seem to bother them. “Fiscal questions trump defense in a way they never would have after 9/11,” Representative Tom Cole, a Republican of Oklahoma, told The Times. “But the war in Iraq is over. Troops are coming home from Afghanistan, and we want to secure the cuts.”
The White House should have released these kinds of details months ago, when there was more time to make a strong case to the public against these cuts. Instead, administration officials failed to discuss the consequences, fearing political blame while confidently predicting the Republicans would cave. The result of that miscalculation — and of the Republican disdain for the health of the economy and those who depend on government services — will become clearer in just a few days.
Ok, hold the phone for a sec. Isn’t it the mainstream press that is always encouraging, cajoling, mocking, screaming, insisting that the Democrats “compromise” in some mysterious “bipartisan” fashion with the Republicans?? Why is the NYTimes surprised that the Republicans insist on nothing but cuts? Why is that a shock at all to the paper of record? Hasn’t it been reading its own news? This is what Republicans do.
Republicans have made no secret about the fact that they want to cut their way out of any kind of shackles to the rest of the country. It’s been staring us in the face for decades now.
So, now they are going to force the president to cut. Duh.
And he’s going to do it. Because he’s not as smart as all the 25 year old male Democratic activist assholes thought he was. Oh, sure, he’s academic smart, sort of, but he’s not politically smart. He’s no Bill Clinton.
Oh, THAT’S right. We’re not supposed to like politically gifted people. I mean, why would we need a politician as president? That’s so 20th century.
And sure the public is going to get all mad and stuff at the cuts. But they’re not going to get mad at Republicans. Noooo, they’re going to get mad at Democrats. They’re going to get mad because there’s a Democratic president in the White House and the Senate is controlled by Democrats. The Republicans only own the House. Even the dullest Joey Bagodonuts out there can freaking count.
But Republicans are going to step it up even more. Yeah, they’re not stupid. They’re going to let go of their resistance to marriage equality. Of course they are. That’s a no-brainer. Sure their base is foaming at the mouth, offensively homophobic. But their base is dying. They only used their base so they could engineer as much power as they could in the form of the gerrymander. They don’t need them now.
How does that make you feel, you so-called Christians? How does it make you feel that you’ve compromised every Christian virtue and become the intolerant, vicious, judgmental, mean spirited, ugly people that the Republicans goaded you to become only to be discarded when the Republicans realized that you were a drag on them?
And now that they’ve embraced marriage equality for gay couples, that’s just going to highlight the problems that the Democrats have with women. And they DO have a problem. It’s massive. Why do you think Hillary Clinton is still popular in spite of all efforts by the party (and it’s her own party that’s doing it) to crush her? It’s because women are desperate for some kind of rational human being with ovaries to stand up for them. So, we can confidently predict that the next candidate for the Democrats is going to be female. But unless she’s Hillary, who already resisted the siren song of the financier class only to be publicly humiliated by them in 2008, the female Democratic candidate is going to be compromised by them. We’ll probably end up with some Kathleen Sebellius type who will continue to act like the presidency is some student council position where the status quo prevails and rocking the boat is not allowed.
I don’t even want to think about what is going to happen next year when the ACA kicks in and a whole new class of people are pissed off about what a mess healthcare reform is without cost controls. Not only that but I believe the the McKinsey report about employers using it as an excuse to lay people off. In fact, just signing the law was an excuse to lay people off far enough in advance so that there will be no obvious correlation when workers are hired back as contractors responsible for their own damn healthcare. It’s a corporate shareholder’s wet dream to go “weightless”. How conveeeeenient that it all happens during an election year and Fox News is not dead yet.
This is what you get when you put a bunch of 25 year old male activists in charge of the party and have them enthralled to the Machiavellian power brokers and Republican carpetbagging financier donors of that party. You get a president who doesn’t have a clue about how to play even one dimensional chess against the Republicans during the worst economic crisis in 80 years.
Thanks for nothing, guys.